StrandedonEarth

They're procedurally generated, and are supposed to come out sounding at least somewhat funny/amusing. I don't even bother reading them. They have better things to do than write a few hundred sensical briefings, so I can put up with nonsensical ones.

I see @max_creative has been busy. This should slow him down

Land on Eve, mine 2000 oreo's, and leave it there. Mine 2000 ore from Gilly, and put it in Gilly orbit or where-ever it's supposed to be. That should complete the contract. If you read the fine print it doesn't actually mention taking 2000 ore from Eve and taking it to Gilly. Just mine 2000 from Eve and bring 2000 to Gilly., My hardest was definitely ejecting a Class E from Kerbol, and I locked onto a 3600 ton 'roid. Before ISRU was a thing. I never did finish that, despite sending a phalanx of spearship tugs out to it. I gave up when it started spinning and couldn't be bothered to rearrange my tugs.

USS Enterprise to the rescue! Ooops, wrong Enterprise. Oh well

Back in 2014 I built this hybrid aircraft/rover for such missions. I somehow doubt it would fly with the new aero though

If I put the LES on my rocket, then nothing ever goes wrong. If something goes wrong with my rocket, there's never an LES on it. So maybe I should just slap an LES on everything, and nothing will ever go wrong! (with the boost phase, anyways)

Welcome to the forums, ISE, and I hope the acceleration to Hypetm speed wasn't too rough on you. Nice job, having 2 rep on 1 post!

MipLoss

Fair enough. The laptop is an i7-3630QM, 6MB L3, quad core @ 2.4 GHz (task manager reports peaks up to 3.2GHz; not sure exactly what that means), 8GB RAM and nvidia GT630m. The desktop is an i3-4170 dual core @ 3.7 GHZ, 8GB RAM, but really hamstrung by Intel HD4400 graphics and a crappy lo-profile, lo-power case that will be a pain to upgrade if it's even possible. I haven't spent a lot of time trying to optimize the settings for better KSP performance on the desktop, since it only holds my kids' attention for a launch or two. So Yeah, much better on the laptop, in my case. Edit: @GregroxMun Sorry for derailing your thread. Good Job getting KSP on the big screen in your class!

I only play on my laptop (i7). It's a lot more powerful than the desktop in the house (i3)

My kerbals never die. They just have horrid visions/nightmares about how things are about to go horribly wrong for them, before they wake up or snap out of it and proceed to do the mission properly. Sometimes they have several similar visions of the same mission failing in slightly different ways, usually while attempting to land. Sometimes they have nightmares about how the mission will never leave the atmosphere, or even the ground! This usually gives them some insight into problems with the rocket being built in the VAB, and they are able to get them fixed before the mission ever launches.

Inspired by this post. I couldn't find a decent stock pic to start from or a meme-site pic that would let me edit it, so I had to butcher it. If anyone wants to do it properly feel free...

And the VAB appears to be floating in the hazy background.... Beautiful pic!

Seeing those orange ants swarming around the bottom of it really puts it in perspective

Obligatory repost, which I first posted in the Devnotes. Just in case any HypeTrain passengers missed it...

It seems to me that both a lunar gateway and a lunar base are needed. A gateway is pointless without a base, and a base would be more difficult and expensive without a gateway. So we should probably develop both in parallel, which shouldn't be as expensive as it first sounds. Each mission can deliver a crew to the gateway and leave a module or tank there, and then continue on to deliver another component the surface to be tele-robotically added to the existing construction. This way a manned presence isn't needed on the surface until the surface base is fully operational, or at least habitable. Some surface structures, such as a FarSide radio antenna, wouldn't need a manned presence at all.

Congrats! As RIC said, the first landing is always the most exciting!

A Pierson Puppeteer! I haven't seen that particular model before! I think evolution demands that the eyes are close to the brain, so that visual threats are perceived quickly. Come to think of it, smell and hearing are close to the brain as well, in most if not all species. At the same time, eyes tend to be near the edge of a body, to minimize the body's exposure while looking for threats (among other reason). For that reason, I don't think that some of sci-fi's proposed alternate anatomies, where brains are better protected, are viable from an evolutionary perspective

People trying to put you d-down? Just because you get around? Things they do look awful c-c-cold Hope you die before you get old ?

"The Avengers" were particularly bad for destroying large chunks of cities. But I guess that's better than being dominated by.... whatever that was/they were I don't really have anything to add that hasn't already been said science-wise, but a recent episode of Chicago Fire bugged me. They were doing an elevator rescue from one car to another, through the sides. They were walking across a 2x6 between the cars with no safety ropes! Of course, all done for dramatic reasons, but c'mon, that's SOP! They're called "repulsorlifts" and they don't have any sort of exhaust port. Yup, more movie magic.

Ye gads! I built one water tower, just one, in a residential area, and i don't even remember why. And i forgot all about it. Then I decided to switch that area over to an ore mining district. Next thing I know I'm wondering why everyone is getting sick and dying. Hospitals are swamped, and the crematoriums are overflowing. CHeck the pollution and water pollution is at 23% and climbing. I switched all my pumps to a pristine freshwater lake and pollution still climbed to 27%! Then I finally found that water tower. A little late! My population is down by 40k, 20k ppl sick, 7k bodies scattered around the city, including way over on the other side of the city from that tower! , and my budget is a mess! I think I'm going to delete water towers from the game so I never build another one! Even after fixing the problem the pop dropped by another 20k, to half of where it was

Well, the Wiki lists 13 tons to LEO. That doesn't say if that's expendable or reusable. If you knock off 30% for reuse, that brings it down to about 9 tons. Also, that figure only says "to LEO" but it doesn't say where in LEO. The Space Shuttle Wiki has two listings for LEO: So it's not a given that F9v1.1 can haul 13 tons to the ISS. As for other satellites, well, it just may be that they haven't found a customer that wants 13 tons in a lower LEO. But they have sent a payload to L1, at a million miles out.

It couldn't be done. Ignoring the fact that many ISS modules were designed to be lifted by the Shuttle, many of the more ungainly items (Canadarm 2 for one) would have required its payload bay. Without that, some sort of support structure would have been needed, adding more up-mass. The payload bay also allowed sending up a few smaller components in one go, without having to pack it into a shipping container (the Shuttle was the shipping container) Aside from that, the Shuttle acted as a work platform, supporting the extra (specially trained) bodies involved in the construction, and providing crane services (Canadarm 1). Oh sure, it could have been built without the Shuttle, but it would have been engineered completely differently. Cost is hard to estimate, it would have needed many more launches. And it probably would have had a different form. Shuttle could lift 16 tons to the ISS.. Falcon 9v1.1 can lift 13 tons. So some components would have needed to be smaller.

A Nivenite, huh? Then you should recognize my avatar, which fits my username quite well.

All I can say is that "You young whippersnappers better stay offa my grass!!!" i have no idea what generation I'm supposed to be. My mom was on the leading edge of the boomers, so I guess I'm genX although I never felt that applied to me either